I included the timestamps to show when these statements were made.  Noname is right.  ABC is using future events to defend past actions.  It doesn't make any sense whatsoever.  I counted at least 20 posts from ABC between the Trashleg vote and his post finally explaining why he ignored it.  I still don't think ABC has responded to Trashleg's reasons for the vote (although Linkzmax did here).  Her post was so long, I find it hard to believe that it was misconstrued as a joke either.  At the time, it was the third vote on A Bad Clown.  He was half-way to being lynched, and still ignored it.  Seems odd.

A Bad Clown still sits at three votes.  Radishead put him at four, but Final-Fan unvoted to vote for "me" (Trangentspree).  At this point, I am comfortable putting it back at four votes, because I don't see anything logical about ABC's defense of himself.

Vote: A Bad Clown

On ABC: The robo thing is making him far more understandable now. It's made me do another read over his posts. I find myself thinking that everytime he seems to clear up things and get suspicion off of him, he goes and says something else that makes me think "HUH!? That makes no sense" and thus I'm back to being a bit suspicious of him. But that makes me wonder if a mafiosi would continue to blunder along like that, or would've been sure to be more careful/take a step out of the limelight for a while. That's making me think he's townie, but still those "HUH" posts linger on my mind as well as noname's timeline thing and the one post I've noticed. If there were to be a deadline(not asking for one either) then ABC might get my vote, but I think right now I'd still be inclined to vote no lynch.* I also realize that it is almost always in the best interests for town to lynch on day one,(and in case it isn't clear I do hope there is a lynch, and that is tied to why I don't want a deadline as it's the only way I'd vote no lynch) but I'm just personally not comfortable voting for a lynch if I'm not at least fairly sure that they are scum. Other criteria to me would be general performance in past games, and would only factor in for me if I was equally suspicious of two players. Note that means that I do see distractions as anti-town and would already go into my thinking if someone is mafia or not.

As odd as it sounds because I thought Zexen's logic last round was backwards, if I somehow knew that Wonk was mafia(as in he already flipped, otherwise he'd be the obvious choice for a vote) then I would definitely vote ABC over no lynch.

On Wonk: For me it's not so much the idea itself. It's more that he brought it up when there was no danger of the day ending without a lynch. Also the fact that he stayed focused on radish when ABC was clearly floundering about makes me question why he was being so insistent.

As for the last bit, that's how I see mafia, as in the players not the game as a whole. Townies may need to be cold or fear of a mislynch would prevent ever winning, but I wouldn't say they should be calculating or heartless at all.

Thank you.  I'm glad someone at least gets my philosophy.

A few things. I brought it up when I did because I feel that if I were to wait for a point when people were considering no lynch it would be too late.  Especially since that often gets people voting for time limits as well.  I stayed focused because I wasn't going to be distracted.  I did make posts on the ABC matter when I felt I had made my points or was going in circles.  If people hadn't kept asking me questions about it I could have moved on a bit sooner. 

I agree with him on cold calculating and heartless.  Although heartless to a point.  Remember it's a game first and that you are playing with people.  Too much heart and the mafia will play right into it then break it.

He was saying it was me doing something I did last round.  So it could mean it's something I do when I'm town. Or something I do to try and seem town.  Problem is though that this doesn't really point either way.

My proporesd idea to lynch radish has been called a few things although I wonder where you get that it's illogical.  Also it's not over either.  I'll be posting something involving my thoughts on the new radish tomorrow.  Covering several topics from how he's read me wrong and thinks he's cleared to how some things he's doing aren't really improvements.  However that will have to wait till tomorrow. 

One last thing that's a bit off topic.  Thank you therepublic for being a replacement and coming in with strong participation.  Last round made me nervous about replacements. 

Townies ... shouldn't be calculating? 

Honestly, my opinion at this point is that it was more likely one of those "too scummy to actually be scum" situations.  But I could be wrong; and I don't know what else I could say to convince you (or anyone, really) that no, your suspicions are totally valid, it's just that his behavior went so far beyond suspicious that surely nobody actually guilty would be so incautious as to say those things. 

Well, there is one specific thing I want to add:  I think it's less likely ABC lied about his reasoning than that he just didn't remember and made up a reason that seemed to make sense, even though, as you point out, it doesn't.